Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well, it was the user not the camera ;-) I was all set to use a tripod and long lenes etc, but in reality, most of the really good opportunities came on the Zodiac's and the 'blad was a little "cumbersome" especially when I tried to set up the tripod ;-) There are some b/w images of ice I'm happy with, but my slides were mostly wrongly exposed: its quite "harsh" light and I needed more "experience" , so that's where the instant feed back wiht the digital was most useful Antarctica is one of the best trips I've ever had and I would strongly recommend it to anyone. Our images are at: http://stmaarten.globat.com/%7eafirkin.com/NewSite/Antarctica/ AntarcticPages.html If you have not already seen them. On 04/09/2006, at 19:08, Scott McLoughlin wrote: > OK, I'm curious. What nasties plagued the Hasselblad shots? > > Scott > > p.s. Antarctic? Wow! I'm jealous :-) > > Alastair Firkin wrote: > >> I have been thrashing around since I came home from the Antarctic. >> My Hasselblad shots were few and far between in success, but the >> Olympus Digital was certainly a winner. So it occurred to me that >> with Helen winning a trip to the arctic, I may be forced to look >> at digital: perhaps the DMR. How do you find it handles for >> nature work? >> >> Cheers >> On 03/09/2006, at 19:53, Douglas Herr wrote: